At least one former Twitter employee is facing prison time for allegedly helping Saudi Arabia spy on critics. Bloombergreports a jury in San Francisco has convicted US resident Ahmad Abouammo of serving as an agent for Saudi Arabia, as well as falsifyi…
US Justice Department is reportedly poised to sue Google over its digital ad dominance
Google may soon be facing its second antitrust lawsuit filed by the US Department of Justice. According to Bloomberg, the DOJ is gearing up to sue the tech giant as soon as September after a year of looking into whether it’s been using its dominant position to illegally control the digital ad market. The Justice Department’s lawyers have reportedly been conducting another round of interviews to glean additional information that could help make their case stronger. These new interviews are expected to build on previous ones conducted much earlier on in the investigation.
The Justice Department first filed an antitrust lawsuit against the company back in 2020, accusing it of having an unfair monopoly over search and search-related advertising. For that particular case, the agency argued that forcing Android phone manufacturers to set Google as the default search engine prevents rivals from gaining traction and ensures that the company will earn an enormous amount of money from search-related advertising.
In the same year, Texas filed a multi-state lawsuit against Google, with the state’s Attorney General accusing the company of using its “monopolistic power to control” ad pricing. The company’s ad practices are under scrutiny not just in the US but in other parts of the world: The European Commission also opened a probe to look into whether Google limits rival services’ access to user data for ad purposes last year. As a concession to the EU’s concerns, Reuters reported in June that Google may let rival ad platforms run ads on YouTube.
While the DOJ has yet to officially file its case, Google spokesperson Peter Schottenfels defended the company’s ad business in a statement to Bloomberg, which says: “Our advertising technologies help websites and apps fund their content, and enable small businesses to reach customers around the world. The enormous competition in online advertising has made online ads more relevant, reduced ad tech fees, and expanded options for publishers and advertisers.”
Google 指控 Sonos 侵犯了七項 Google 助理技術專利
Google 指控 Sonos 侵犯了七項 Google 助理技術專利。
South Korea to investigate Apple, Google over possible in-app payment violations
Apple and Google are already facing scrutiny in the wake of a South Korean law requiring that they allow third-party payments. Reutersreports the Korea Communications Commission (KCC) will investigate Apple, Google and SK Group’s One Store over potential violations of the in-app payment law. Regulators said they started inspecting the digital shops on May 17th, and found enough to be concerned all three might have broken the rules.
It’s not certain just how the firms might have violated the law. MacRumorsnoted that a delay in communicating changes might have played a role in Apple’s case. While the law (a revision of the Telecommunications Business Act) took effect in March, Apple didn’t notify developers until late June. Google alerted Android developers in November of last year.
Both companies still take cuts from purchases made using alternative billing systems — they just take smaller portions. When Google announced its policy change, it maintained that it needed fees to “continue to invest” in Android and the Play Store. It’s not clear if these policies play any role in the investigation, however.
We’ve asked Apple and Google for comment. In a statement to Reuters, Google said it would continue cooperating with the KCC and that it had “worked closely” with both the government and developers to comply with the law.
The law allows for fines as high as two percent of the average yearly revenue for related business. Officials didn’t set expectations for possible fines, but the stores are major money generators. Apple, for example, paid developers $60 billion worldwide in 2021 and made a tidy profit for itself through fees on those sales. Even if South Korea only considered revenue earned within its borders to be actionable for fines, this could still lead to steep penalties if the KCC finds any violations.
Google and Sonos are now fighting over voice assistant patents
Google has sued Sonos, alleging that its new voice assistant violates seven patents related to its own Google Assistant technology, CNET has reported. It’s the latest salvo in a long-running smart speaker battle between the companies, with each suing and countersuing the other following a period when they worked together.
“[Sonos has] started an aggressive and misleading campaign against our products, at the expense of our shared customers,” a Google spokesperson said in a statement.
Sonos’ Voice Control assistant arrived in June, letting users give commands with the phrase “Hey Sonos,” much like Amazon’s Alexa or Google Assistant. In the complaint, Google said it “worked for years with Sonos engineers on the implementation of voice recognition and voice-activated devices control in Sonos products… even providing its Google Assistant software to Sonos for many years.”
The fight erupted in early 2020 when Sonos sued Google for alleged patent infringement after the companies had collaborated for several years. Sonos claimed that Google gained knowledge of its technology when they worked together and used that information to develop its own smart speaker line. The company filed another suit in September 2020, claiming that Google infringed on five more patents.
Google countersued, alleging that Sonos was using Google’s search, software, networking, audio processing and other technology without paying a license fee and made “false claims” about their work together
In 2021, the US International Trade Commission ruled that Google infringed on five Sonos patents. That forced Google to change the way its speakers were set up to avoid an import ban. Most of those were related to the way speaker groups are controlled — for instance, users can no longer change the volume of a group of speakers and must adjust them individually instead.
“Google previously sued us all over the world and Sonos has prevailed in every decided case,” Sonos’ chief legal officer Eddie Lazarus told CNET. “[The latest lawsuits] are an intimidation tactic designed to retaliate against Sonos for speaking out against Google’s monopolistic practices.”
Report: Apple retaliated against women who complained about misconduct
The Financial Times has published a lengthy report saying that Apple has fostered a culture of apathy toward reports of employee misconduct, and has actively retaliated against staff members who complained about colleagues, including those who reported incidents of sexual assault. If accurate, the allegations are at odds with the image of inclusiveness that Apple projects, and cast a pall on the real progress it has made in boosting its workforce diversity.
Multiple women described filing complaints with Apple’s human resources department over sexual abuse, bullying and other incidents. Former employee Megan Mohr complained that a colleague removed her bra and clothes while she was asleep and took photos of her after a platonic night out. However, the HR representative called the experience “a minor traffic accident.”
“Although what he did was reprehensible as a person and potentially criminal, as an Apple employee he hasn’t violated any policy in the context of his Apple work,” Apple’s HR department said in an email seen by FT. “And because he hasn’t violated any policy we will not prevent him seeking employment opportunities that are aligned with his goals and interests.”
An Apple Store Genius employee complained about two instances of serious sexual assault including being raped, and said HR treated her not as a victim, but as the problem. “I was told [the alleged rapist] went on a ‘career experience’ for six months and they said: ‘maybe you’ll be better by the time he’s back?” She requested a transfer but it was declined, and she still works at the same store.
IP attorney Margaret Anderson complained of a “toxic work environment” and “gaslighting,” and said a male vice-president wanted to fire her, citing false allegations that predated her arrival at Apple. HR reportedly ignored a document she created refuting the allegations.
Employees have also complained about Apple suppressing worker organizing and blocking Slack channels used by employees to complain about bad managers and pay inequity. Software engineer Cher Scarlett said Apple retaliated after she filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The company offered her a $213,000 severance package, but she refused to sign it because Apple demanded she hand over a letter sent to the NLRB that included the names of other employees.
That’s their playbook. Offer me enough money to pay off my lawyers and debt, and they wanted a list of people to retaliate against. How do I talk about how egregious that truly is?
She accepted the deal when Apple withdrew the demand, but was forced to pull the NLRB complaint. However, she intentionally broke the agreement when Apple sent a letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) saying it “supports the rights of its employees and contractors to speak freely.” Scarlett then showed her exit arrangement to the media, which led to eight US state treasurers asking the SEC to investigate “whether or not Apple misled the Commission and investors.”
The highest profile complaint was from Jayne Whitt, a director in Apple’s legal department. She told HR that a colleague hacked her devices and threatened her life, with the expectation that the complaint would be handled seriously. Instead, the employee investigative division said Whitt “failed to act in a professional and work appropriate manner” during their meeting, at a time when Whitt “said she was begging for help and reliving trauma,” the FT wrote.
She subsequently posted a 2,800 word essay on the whistleblower platform The Lioness describing the situation, prompting an outpouring of support from Apple employees. However, Apple proceeded to fire her based on what she called an “irrelevant” six-year-old indiscretion.
Whitt is now challenging Apple legally, and said the Slack channels on gender-pay disparity helped open her eyes. “I was disadvantaged — this is how women struggle,” she said. “Had these stories [on Slack] not been coming out, I would not have been compelled to do the right thing, to blow up my career.”
Apple told The Financial Times in a statement that it works hard to thoroughly investigate misconduct allegations and strives to create “an environment where employees feel comfortable reporting any issues.” However, it acknowledged not having always met those ideals. “There are some accounts raised that do not reflect our intentions or our policies and we should have handled them differently, including certain exchanges reported in this story. As a result, we will make changes to our training and processes.” It wouldn’t comment on specific cases “out of respect for the privacy of the individuals involved.”
US Attorneys General will take legal action against telecom providers enabling robocalls
The Attorneys General of all 50 states have joined forces in hopes of giving teeth to the seemingly never-ending fight against robocalls. North Carolina AG Josh Stein, Indiana AG Todd Rokita and Ohio AG Dave Yost are leading the formation of the new Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force. In Stein’s announcement, he said the group will focus on taking legal action against telecoms, particularly gateway providers, allowing or turning a blind eye to foreign robocalls made to US numbers.
He explained that gateway providers routing foreign phone calls into the US telephone network have the responsibility under the law to ensure the traffic they’re bringing in is legal. Stein said that they mostly aren’t taking any action to keep robocalls out of the US phone network, though, and they’re even intentionally allowing robocall traffic through in return for steady revenue in many cases.
Stein said in a statement:
“We’re… going to take action against phone companies that violate state and federal laws. I’m proud to create this nationwide task force to hold companies accountable when they turn a blind eye to the robocallers they’re letting on to their networks so they can make more money. I’ve already brought one pathbreaking lawsuit against an out-of-state gateway provider, and I won’t hesitate to take legal action against others who break our laws and bombard North Carolinians with these harmful, unlawful calls.”
The Attorney General referenced data from the National Consumer Law Center, which previously reported that American phone numbers get more than 33 million scam robocalls a day. Those include Social Security scams targeting seniors and gift card scams, wherein bad actors pretend they’re from the IRS. In that report, the center warned that consumers will keep on getting robocalls as long as phone providers are earning from them.
Stein already has experience sparring with shady gateway providers. Back in January, he sued Articul8 for routing more than 65 million calls to phone numbers in North Carolina and inundating residents with up to 200 fraudulent telemarketing calls every single day. He previously urged the FCC to implement measures designed to put a stop to illegal foreign calls made through providers like Articul8, as well. And in 2019, Stein became instrumental in the development of an agreement between the US Attorneys General and 12 carriers in the country to use the STIR/SHAKEN call-blocking technology.
New York regulators slap Robinhood’s crypto business with $30 million fine
In the latest in what seems to be a string of challenges the company has to grapple with, Robinhood’s crypto division has been slapped with a $30 million fine by the New York State Department of Financial Services. It’s the first crypto-focused enforcement action by the regulator, which has issued the multimillion dollar penalty against Robinhood for what it says are violations against the state’s anti-money laundering and cybersecurity regulations. In its announcement, the Financial Services Department said it found significant deficiencies in the company’s compliance programs following a supervisory examination.
Apparently, there weren’t enough people working in Robinhood’s money laundering compliance program. The company also failed to transition from a manual monitoring system, which is no longer sufficient now that it’s much larger than when it started. In addition, the department found that policies within Robinhood’s cybersecurity program aren’t in full compliance with official cybersecurity and virtual currency regulations.
The New York regulator also mentioned that Robinhood improperly certified compliance with the Department’s Transaction Monitoring Regulation and Cybersecurity Regulation. Since it wasn’t fully compliant with the state’s cybersecurity rules, Robinhood violated the law by claiming compliance. Finally, the regulator said Robinhood failed to adhere to consumer protection requirements by not maintaining a separate phone number (and displaying it on its website) specifically for consumer complaints.
Superintendent of Financial Services, Adrienne A. Harris, said in a statement:
“As its business grew, Robinhood Crypto failed to invest the proper resources and attention to develop and maintain a culture of compliance—a failure that resulted in significant violations of the Department’s anti-money laundering and cybersecurity regulations. All virtual currency companies licensed in New York State are subject to the same anti-money laundering, consumer protection, and cybersecurity regulations as traditional financial services companies. DFS will continue to investigate and take action when any licensee violates the law or the Department’s regulations, which are critical to protecting consumers and ensuring the safety and soundness of the institutions.”
Aside from having to pay $30 million, Robinhood must retain an independent consultant who will evaluate if it has taken the appropriate actions to address its violations and deficiencies under the settlement.
Robinhood also recently announced that it’s laying off 23 percent of its workforce due to record inflation and the cryptocurrency crash. It’s the company’s second round of job cuts this year and will affect employees across divisions. That revelation came after Robinhood published its earnings for the second quarter of 2022, wherein it posted a net loss of $295 million and announced a decrease of 1.9 million in monthly active users.
Meta faces lawsuit for allegedly collecting patient health data without consent
Meta may have scooped up sensitive medical information without consent. The Vergereports that two proposed class-action lawsuits accuse the company and hospitals of violating HIPAA, the California Invasion of Privacy Act and other laws by collecting patient data without consent. Meta’s Pixel analytic tracking tool allegedly sent health statuses, appointment details and other data to Facebook when it was present on patient portals.
In one lawsuit from last month, a patient said Pixel gathered data from the UC San Francisco and Dignity Health portals that was used to deliver ads related to heart and knee issues. The second lawsuit, from June, is broader and claims at least 664 providers shared medical info with Facebook through Pixel.
We’ve asked Meta for comment. The company requires that sites using Pixel obtain the right to share data before sending it to Facebook, but the plaintiffs claim Meta refused to enforce its policies. It placed Pixel on the facilities’ websites despite knowing the kind of data it would collect, according to the lawsuits.
The lawsuits aren’t guaranteed to achieve class-action status, and such lawsuits rarely provide large payouts to individuals. If successful, though, the legal action could prove costly for Meta. They’re asking for damages on behalf of all Facebook users whose healthcare providers rely on Pixel, and that could include millions of people.
They also follow a string of privacy-related US legal action against the social media giant. Meta is facing a DC Attorney General suit over Cambridge Analytica’s collection of more than 70 million Americans’ personal data. The company is also grappling with lawsuits over its deactivated facial recognition system, and only this year settled a 2012 class-action over the use of tracking cookies. These latest courtroom battles suggest that concerns about Meta’s data gathering practices are far from over, even as the company makes its own efforts to crack down on misuse.
The Morning After: Did Microsoft just neg Activision Blizzard?
In a recent filing, Microsoft told New Zealand’s Commerce Commission that Activision Blizzard produces no “must-have” games. Weird thing to say when the company plans to spend $68.7 billion to buy the gaming giant behind Call of Duty, Overwatch, Diablo…